One of the reasons I think we are so poor at defending set pieces is that out keepers are coached to be way too passive. Rarely do they try to catch or punch set piece deliveries into their six-yard boxes. Both of the goals we conceded tonight against Mexico were on balls that Howard easily could have could caught or punched had he been more aggresive. However, this is not just a problem with one keeper. Keller and Freidel played just as passively, with predictable consequences. Go back and look at the goals we concded during the 2002 World Cup...five out of the seven were on balls served into the six-yard box that Freidel played too passively, including Ballack's goal in the Quarterfinal. Anybody know why our keepers are trained to play this way?
Obviously, most will disagree with you as American keepers seem to end up in the EPL with regularity. Either you didn't watch closely or have never played goalie or whatever. You said goals that "easily could have been caught"? What a laugh........ Maybe you are right and they should be more aggessive. Like Memo Ochoa tonight, who fanned on a cross and never recovered mentally. At one point they showed a closeup of Ochoa and it looked like he wanted to hide or be anywhere, anywhere but Reliant Stadium playing soccer. Yep, goalie is the least of our problems. How could you focus on our goalkeeping when our fullbacks were so atrocious? Or are you one of those "blame the goalie" types of fans?
alright, i think i found out the problems with our set pieces and giving them up, after pain staking research and hours in the film room i have come up with this: a) drew moor b) ramiro corrales
Pardo's service on the first goal was perfect. The second came off the won header, so it was as much of a fault of the previous marker as it is of Moor's. As to marking - the US usually plays zone defense on set-pieces. Otherwise, I don't see how Moor ended up on Magallon. But zone defense is vulnerable to deep runs.
Barthez? We don't need no stinking Fabien Barthez... See #10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqMaSWSZZ5c See what I mean?
On the first goal, Magallon made contact with the ball well inside the six-yard box...on the second, right on the edge of the six-yard box. The first ball could easily have been caught by Howard, and he probably could've punched the second at the very least. Yes, Moor is at fault for losing his marker, but if Howard catches/punches either ball, Moor's lousy marking doesn't even become an issue. The larger point I was trying to make is that our keepers seem to have been coached to always stay on their line, something which gives our defenders more chances to screw up. I first started thinking about this way back in 2002, and tonight's match rekindled these thoughts. As brilliant as Freidel was in 2002, his passivity on set pieces also really hurt us. Five of the seven goals we conceded were off of set pieces (the exceptions being Agoos' own goal and the PK against Poland), and on almost every one, Freidel could have caught or punched the cross clear if he had been more aggresive. For example, Ballack's goal in the QF was headed in from well inside the six-yard box and could easily been caught by Freidel had he been so inclined. The fact all of our keepers play this way makes me think that it has something to do with the way they are coached. From my perspective, the fewer chances we give our defenders to make a mistake, the better, which is why I think our keepers should be more aggressive.
A combination of not so good defending and perfect service ='s goal. While Moor's man scored the goal, there was another player free in front of Moor that could have scored just as easily if the ball was a little lower. I think you will find that most goalies would have stayed on their line on that play. Freidel and Howard have had plenty of different goalie coaches and are at the top levels of their position.
When I got back from the hospital and turned on the match, the first thing I saw was that those two were playing. I turned to my wife and said "playing Moor and Corrales will cost the US a goal tonight". 10 minutes later-- they combined to cost us a goal (and then Moor, not happy to be just a part of a team, doubled his tally by taking sole credit for one). Just aweful. What happened last time Corrales was capped prior to his exile to Scandanevia? He surrendered a PK. Please don't ever cap him again.
Hilarious! At least Bradley has got them to play complementary roles; the one causes set pieces; the other blows his assignments. Who says Bob can't coach?
I thought Timmy could have come out on the first one to try to punch...but it would have been hard b/c of the first Mexican attacker that could have scored... On the second goal, the US defense was marking tightly out by the penalty spot...there is no need to go that far out on a corner...the attacking players were destined to make runs towards the goal, so why get yourself in a position to get beat that far away...they should have been defending about 3-4 yards back towards goal, picking up the runners as they came in...
I thought maybe he could have come on the first goal sine it was met so close in. But, it really was a great ball in, driven low and hard. A goalie really can't come for that ball so low, because there is always a chance of someone getting an early touch. The second one, was flicked across before Howard could have gotten it asn was another driven cross. I do tend to think crosses are the weakest part of Howard's game. But, sometimes the offense just plays a great ball in adn you have to be able to rely on yoyur defense to help you out. Howard got screwed over by his both times.
Absolutely right. The idea that just because the finish comes within the 6-yard box the keeper could or should have cleared is a joke. On the first goal, a driven ball came across the box where there were a dozen players. If Howard doesn't stay home, any one of them could have poked into an empty net. He has no way of knowing it's going to make it all the way through to the back post...that's why you have to actually mark the opposition's players. Again on the second goal it was a near-post flick. Not sure what you expect Timmy to do there.
sometimes the most obvious answers are the most true. how bad is our depth on the outside that we had no two better options than these two chuckleheads? We could run out 10 different DMids but can't find even one decent outside defender when 'Dolo is hurt?
I think Bradley said, I know that Spector can handle right back if I need him in an important game, so let's see if I can get a little more offense out of Moor. The answer I think is obvious. With regards to LB, Bornstein looks like the preferred option but after him where do we stand? Pearce hasn't looked great for the US and isn't starting. Corrales look poor tonight. I don't know what our #2 option is other than Spector at both.